Friday, September 28, 2012

While you weren't looking: FBI
and CIA embrace homosexual movement. Reaching out to "gay and
transgender community." Look for crackdown on pro-family groups. (via MassResistance.org)

The US military and State Department
aren't the only branches of the US government to "go gay." Since the
Obama Administration took control, the FBI and CIA, the two main federal law enforcement and surveillance organizations,
have fully embraced the homosexual and transgender movements, and
appear to be poised to crack down on pro-family groups and citizens who
are critical.

A. Yes. The FBI does not discriminate
against a person's sexual orientation with regard to hiring decisions.
To be sure, the FBI has open lesbian, gay, bisexual, and possibly
transgender employees, as well as an LGBT Advisory Committee. The FBI
welcomes and appreciates the contribution of its LGBT employees.

Q. Can you be gay and be an FBI Agent?

A. Yes. In fact, you can be gay in any position within the FBI.

Q. Does the FBI celebrate PRIDE?

A. Yes. The FBI recently held an
informal reception at FBI Headquarters and was proud to have
Congressman Barney Frank as its speaker. Also, individual field offices
are encouraged to have their own celebrations, educational
presentations, or participate in LGBT community events.

Q. Does the FBI have an LGBT Advisory Committee?

A. Yes. The FBI recently formed the LGBT
Advisory Committee under the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity
Affairs. The committee is composed of both Special Agents and support
employees and is represented by gay, straight, and lesbian employees.
The committee's members are from all over the United States. The
purpose of the committee is to listen to the voices of the FBI LGBT
employees and communicate concerns, policies, and ways in which the FBI
can recognize its LGBT employees. The committee meets telephonically
each month to discuss old and new business and meets twice each year at
Headquarters.

Q. I'm not out at work, but I want to be. Does the FBI provide assistance with coming out?

A. The LGBT Advisory Committee, as well
as the employee assistance programs and counselors, are available to
employees who need assistance with coming out or adjusting to being
openly gay at work.

The CIA and "gay pride"

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
has actually been involved with the homosexual movement for over 15
years, according to its website. The CIA boasts about its internal
organization called the Agency Network of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Employees and Allies (ANGLE). ANGLE helps recruit LGBT employees and sets up CIA Pride Month celebrations at various CIA offices around the country.

In addition, ANGLE involves CIA employees in general "gay pride" activities. (They've gone from spying to participating!) For example, the following was on its website:

In further
celebration of Pride Month, the CIA participated in Capital Pride's
Festival, the annual LGBT celebration in Washington, D.C. The annual
event is the third largest Pride festival in the country, attracting
more than 250,000 people. Officers from ANGLE, the Center for Mission
Diversity and Inclusion, and the CIA's Recruitment Center discussed
career opportunities at the Agency as well as efforts to create an
inclusive and supportive environment for LGBT employees.

Most recently, pro-life activist Peter D'Attilio,
who simply holds signs and leaflets, has been informed by police that
he is on an FBI terrorist watch list. The Family Research Council's
offices and a guard were shot by a gunman after the SPLC labeled them a
"hate group."

Going after pro-family groups and citizens?

So when we start to see headlines like
these in homosexual publications, we get concerned to say the least.

At the gay pride event, according to the
press reports, the person running the CIA booth told people, "The CIA
headquarters will soon have two unixex restrooms."Department of Justice leading the way

The FBI's parent agency, the Department
of Justice under Eric Holder, has gone to extraordinary lengths to
promote the LGBT agenda. This summer Eric Holder personally gave a top
DOJ award, with great fanfare, to a "transgender" DOJ attorney - a man
who dresses as a woman. In particular, this man is helping sue school
districts that don't sufficiently implement pro-homosexual
"anti-bullying" programs.

Not your father's US Justice Department. Attorney General Eric Holder presents special award to transgender activist Diana Flynn, a man wearing women's clothes,
during the DOJ's LGBT Pride Month program. At right is Chai
Feldblum, radical lesbian activist and Commissioner of the EEOC.

There's no question that Barack Obama is
more aggressive at pushing the radical homosexual and transgender
agendas than anyone could possibly have imagined. The fact that the
mainstream media (and most of the conservative media) is almost
completely silent about this gives him even more cover to continue. In a
second term, it would unquestionably get even worse.

Would Mitt Romney be like Obama in this
regard? Or would he put a stop to, or roll back, what Obama has done?
When Romney announced to a national audience that he would support "gay
rights" and in effect be the most pro-homosexual Republican president
ever, that didn't give us much confidence. Plus, he supports "gays" in
the military. We'll see what happens.

Friday, September 21, 2012

UPDATE: New information on the accusations that Chick-fil-A caved in to the homosexual movement's demands. (via email from MassResistance.org)

In our last email,
dated Sept. 21, we excoriated Chick-fil-A and its CEO Dan Cathy for
allegedly caving in to the demands of the homosexual movement. Our
title was: Chick-fil-A caves in to homosexual pressure. Agrees not to
donate to pro-family groups in exchange for permission to put
restaurant in Chicago. Slap in the face to pro-family supporters.

It appears that this is largely not
true. We've published the truth below. But finally finding that out
wasn't easy.

This is definitely one of the most
exasperating news stories we've ever covered. Getting to the facts has
entailed wading through a lot of confusion generated by the homosexual
movement, the pro-family movement, and especially Chick-fil-A itself.

What was reported in the press

Our email quoted from the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Washington Times, Huffington Post, and a homosexual press release.

They all basically reported the following: Chick-fil-A
officials had told Chicago Alderman Joe Monero in writing that the
company would no longer donate any money to "anti-gay," pro-family
groups.

Chick-fil-A also allegedly showed
documentation that they had not recently given money to such groups.
The company supposedly also promised to make an internal statement
about non-discrimination on sexual orientation. In doing this,
Chick-fil-A reportedly had negotiated with Moreno and also a Chicago
homosexual activist group called "Civil Rights Agenda."

In return, as Monero gleefully
announced, he would not block Chick-fil-A's efforts to open a
restaurant in his trendy Chicago district. He termed this a "great
victory for the gay rights movement."

Several newspapers contacted Chick-fil-A for their comments on this, but the company refused to respond except to direct them to a statement on their website.

Chick-fil-A's two main statements they've been giving out regarding this were:

The Chick-fil-A
culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every
person with honor, dignity and respect - regardless of their belief,
race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this
tradition in the over 1,600 Restaurants run by independent
Owner/Operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.

And

The WinShape
Foundations [Chick-fil-A's non-profit arm] is now taking a much closer
look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process
will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas.

These statements certainly lend
credence to the charges as reported in the last few days that the
company was changing its policy of donating to pro-family groups. And
Chick-fil-A said nothing to the press to descredit that interpretation.

As a result, the story was reported
everywhere that Chick-fil-A had caved in to the demands of the
homosexual movement. For example:

Thus in our recent email, we reported on what every news agency was saying, along with what we could find on the Chick-fil-A website about it.

More confusion from the pro-family movement

Soon after publishing our article, we
were inundated by over a hundred people emailing us articles by CitizenLink.com (Focus on the Family) and WorldNetDaily, which deny the press reports about Chick-fil-A caving in. Now, we are great admirers of CitizenLink and WorldNetDaily, but in our opinion their articles only added to the confusion.

The WorldNetDaily article, "Press suckered by Chick-fil-A fairy tale",
mostly regurgitates Chick-fil-A's press releases and corporate policy
statements, which are not particularly helpful as "evidence" one way or
another. But it adds no substantial facts.

Neither of these articles is persuasive to an unbiased reader.

And what's the truth? Did they really cave in?

Friday afternoon we were finally
successful in reaching someone in the Chick-fil-A public relations
department. Previously, we were only able to reach people who were not
knowledgeable of the situation, would not comment, or just recorded
messages. The public relations woman we talked to was fairly candid,
which was refreshing. We asked her direct questions, and she answered
them.

The main points of our conversation:

She told us unequivocally that Chick-fil-A
is going to continue to donate to the same pro-family groups as
before, even the ones that the homosexual groups disapprove of. We specifically asked her if this included Family Research Council, Exodus International, Eagle Forum, and Focus on the Family. She said "Yes, it includes those."

But what about the public statements
that Chick-fil-A was (1) re-evaluating who they give to, and (2)
would avoid the "gay marriage" arena completely? She agreed that
those statements were confusing but would not elaborate further as to
why they are being pushed.

Why did Chick-fil-A refuse to respond
to questions by the press about this, which would have cleared
things up? She said that the company often doesn't respond to the
media because of the media's propensity to spin things. (We suggested
that in this case it was necessary.)

Did Chick-fil-A executives actually meet and negotiate with Alderman Moreno and the homosexual group Civil Rights Agenda? She said she did not know whether they did or not.

Did CEO Dan Cathy actually meet with college homosexual activists to find "common ground" as has been widely reported in the press? She said she did not know.

We talked for quite a while and she reiterated those points. We asked the obvious question:
If Chick-fil-A is giving to the same pro-family groups as before --
and this is the crux of the heated issue here -- why not say that
clearly on a prominent place on the web site, and tell it to the press,
instead of having them read a confusing and misleading policy
statement? It would have solved all the misunderstanding going around.
She didn't have an answer to that.

So apparently Chick-fil-A really isn't caving in. But who would have known?

Did the liberal media malevolently spin this?

The big theme among the conservative bloggers, including even Michelle Malkin
is that the evil liberal media was using their usual tactics to spin
disinformation -- that Chick-fil-A is caving in to the homosexuals.

We don't buy that. This time, we think
the media did its due diligence. It was Chick-fil-A that was being
squirrely.

Here's what we surmise actually happened:
The Chick-fil-A executives met with the Alderman and the homosexual
group, and gave them their "official" statements that imply -- though
don't state specifically -- that Chick-fil-A is changing its donations
policy. They also gave them their 2011 Form 990, which probably doesn't
show any "troubling" donations. The Alderman and the homosexuals
accepted the reasonable meaning of the words, and probably exaggerated a
bit and claimed "victory" to the media. When asked by the press for
their side of the story, Chick-fil-A refused to talk and simply pointed
to the ambiguous and misleading "policy" statements.

In something as charged as this, one
should not have to search for a "public relations" person to get the
basic facts. Chick-fil-A should be straightforward on the website --
unless they are trying to obscure something.

Why you should be angry

All this just exacerbates the horrible double standard going on.
Corporations across America openly brag about the millions of dollars
they give to fund the radical homosexual movement. Yet Chick-fil-A
tries to dance around and obfuscate the relatively tiny amounts it
gives to groups fighting for the truth (e.g., they gave just $1000 to
Family Research Council). Why not just be upfront and "proud" of doing
good things?

We tried our best to get the real story and report it to you accurately.
We think that Chick-fil-A's refusal to deny the allegations against it
with a clear statement of the facts, and to further make it difficult
and confusing for even its allies to get a straight story, produced the
result they deserve: misleading press reports across the country. And
the sophomoric blather from the conservative movement trying to defend
them only added to the problem.

You, our readers, are the ones who have also suffered by not getting the facts you deserved. It's possible that this email is the most accurate article out there on this incident!

The larger problems still stand.
You can't play down the middle on these large culture-war issues. It
just doesn't work. And if the reports are true that Mr. Cathy and other
company executives are meeting with radical GLBT groups, that should
be of concern to pro-family people. You can't "negotiate" with the LGBT
radicals for "common ground." There is no common ground with these
people. They are out to radically change society. They certainly don't
ever look for common ground with us.

Finally, unless there is an
incredibly compelling reason, this is the last Chick-fil-A article that
MassResistance will be doing. We've had it. We tried to do the right
thing and got a lot of abuse for it. Let somebody else have the
aggravation of figuring them out.

=============================

PREVIOUSLY REPORTED:Chick-fil-A caves in to
homosexual pressure. Agrees not to donate to pro-family groups in
exchange for permission to put restaurant in Chicago. Slap in the face
to pro-family supporters. (Via email from MassResistance.org)

We all remember Wednesday, August 1 --
Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. Thousands of pro-family citizens across
America took the time (and money) flock to Chick-fil-A restaurants in
support of their then-courageous stand for pro-family values, including
traditional marriage. It was the restaurant's biggest grossing day in
its entire history.

In the Burlington mall just
outside of Boston, this is what the line looked like -- 50 yards away from the Chick-fil-A store!
[MassResistance photo]

A week earlier, the Mayor of Boston and a Chicago ward boss had both threatened
not to allow the restaurant to open branches in their areas because
they disagreed with the pro-family traditional religious beliefs
espoused by Chick-fil-A's owner. Left-wing politicians and homosexual
groups had complained that the company's non-profit arm had donated
money to pro-family groups such as the Family Research Council, Exodus International, and Focus on the Family. And the owner, Dan Cathy, had publicly defended that position.

Here's what Dan Cathy, president of Chick-fil-A, famously told the Baptist Press on June 16:

"Well, guilty as charged. We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that. We
intend to stay the course. We know that it might not be popular with
everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share
our values and operate on biblical principles."

But this week, in probably the most cowardly and disgraceful move yet by a company, Chick-fil-A
has capitulated to the demands of the homosexual movement and
announced that its non-profit arm will no longer donate money to
pro-family groups.

In exchange for that promise, the Chicago politician will allow the Chick-fil-A to set up a restaurant in his district.

A Chicago
alderman who made national headlines during the summer for opposing a
Chick-fil-A in his increasingly trendy Northwest Side ward has reversed
course, saying he will let the fast-food chain open a store in Logan
Square.

Ald. Proco "Joe" Moreno, 1st, said the
restaurant has agreed to include a statement of respect for all sexual
orientations in an internal documentand promised that its not-for-profit arm would not contribute money to groups that oppose gay marriage.

Secret negotiations with Chicago politician and homosexual group

In fact, despite CEO Dan Cathy's strong
words about "staying the course," Chick-fil-A badly wanted the
Alderman's permission to open a restaurant in his district. It's now
been revealed that Chick-fil-A executives have been secretly
negotiating with both Alderman Moreno and a hardcore Illinois
homosexual activist group over what concessions by Chick-fil-A were
necessary for the restaurant to be allowed.

As a result of
the negotiations, Mr. Moreno received a letter signed by John E.
Featherston Jr., a senior director of real estate for Chick-fil-A,
stating, "The WinShape Foundations is now taking a much closer look at
the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain
true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with
political agendas."

Mr. Moreno said in an interview
Wednesday that he believes the company will stop "using money to fund
groups that have antigay causes. They have committed in writing they
will not do that."

He said company executives showed him
records of its charitable giving for the year that does not include
groups such as Focus on the Family, Exodus International or other
groups that oppose marriage equality or have fought against the
expansion of gay rights.

Keeping it quiet

On Wednesday, the Washington Times
reported on how Chick-fil-A wanted to keep it quiet that they had
been negotiating with both the alderman and the homosexual group:

The
Christian-rooted fast food restaurant agreed to stop funding groups
such as Focus on the Family that oppose same-sex marriage in a meeting
with the Chicago politician who had been blocking the company's move
there. Chick-fil-A wrote a letter to Alderman Joe Moreno affirming this,
according to his spokesman, Matt Bailey, but the company initially
wouldn't allow his office to release the letter to the public. Three
weeks later they relented.

"There was concern from them," said Anthony Martinez, executive director for the Civil Rights Agenda, the Illinois lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender group that negotiated with both Chick-fil-A and the alderman
to stop funding for so-called anti-gay groups. "They really didn't
want to announce it, really, but, of course, the alderman needed to
clarify why he was changing his stance on them opening a restaurant
within his ward."

Chick-fil-A did not return requests for
comment, and has previously said it will not discuss the issue with the
media.

Mr. Martinez said Chick-fil-A told the
alderman they will no longer fund groups that support traditional
marriage through their charity arm, the WinShape Foundation, and will
instead use that money toward educational programs and food donations.

However, on Tuesday the Illinois LGBT group, "Civil Rights Agenda" had put out a statement of its own which said:

"We are very
pleased with this outcome and thank Alderman Moreno for his work on
this issue," said Anthony Martinez, executive director of The Civil
Rights Agenda. "I think the most substantive part of this outcome is
that Chick-fil-A has ceased donating to organizations that promote
discrimination, specifically against LGBT civil rights. It has taken
months of discussion, both with our organization and with the Alderman,
for Chick-fil-A to come forward with these concessions and we feel
this is a strong step forward for Chick-fil-A and the LGBT community,
although it is only a step."

The Washington Times added
that Alderman Moreno declared that this "constituted a major victory
for gay rights." (We can hear the celebrating already.)

The sickening homosexual
"kiss ins" at Chick-fil-A restaurants likely did their job --
intimidating the management into caving to their demands.
[MassResistance photo.]

Setting a terrible precedent

The concept that you need a politician's
permission to open and operate a business that is otherwise completely
legal -- if the politician doesn't approve of the owner's personal
political views -- may seem un-American to the average person. But
that's what's happening here. And that's why so many people had come to
Chick-fil-A's support in the first place.

Reason Magazine,
although reliably pro-gay and not at all pro-family, stated pretty
clearly what is really going on and what the implications are:

Just to make it
clear, Moreno was going to block this restaurant not because of issues
with infrastructure or traffic issues or safety or any actual matter
of municipal governance. He was going to block the construction of this
restaurant because he objected to the political positions of the
company owners and their constitutionally protected speech in the form
of donations.

This is not something supporters of gay
marriage should be proud of. It is something to be terrified of. It is a
weapon that can be used against anybody whose political views fall
within the minority in the communities in which they live.

According to reports, Chick-fil-A's
appeasement is also being extended to their pro-homosexual critics on
college campuses. On August 31, the Huffington Post reported that

Reliable
sources who do not wish to be identified at this time tell the HuffPost
Gay Voices team that Dan Cathy, the fast food chain's president,
"welcomed campus leaders to a private luncheon in Atlanta on Thursday
to discuss diversity, hospitality and the opportunity to find common
ground."

We suspect that the "common ground"
includes a similar promise to capitulate in return for less
confrontational business opportunities.

No comment from Chick-fil-A

Chick-fil-A has avoided or refused
multiple requests by the news media for comment on this issue. Instead,
they have forwarded a statement titled "Chick-fil-A: Who We Are," about non-discrimination and the political arena which they had first posted on their Facebook page back in July.

Chick-fil-A is a
family-owned and family-led company serving the communities in which
it operates. From the day Truett Cathy started the company, he began
applying biblically-based principles to managing his business. For
example, we believe that closing on Sundays, operating debt-free and
devoting a percentage of our profits back to our communities are what
make us a stronger company and Chick-fil-A family.

The Chick-fil-A culture and service
tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor,
dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual
orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over
1,600 Restaurants run by independent Owner/Operators. Going forward, our
intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the
government and political arena.

Our mission is simple: to serve great
food, provide genuine hospitality and have a positive influence on all
who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.

When they first posted this, it was
not publicized and attracted virtually no interest. Three days before,
the company president had announced his intent to continue donating to
pro-family causes, and this appeared to be just a bland "company"
statement about internal "policy." There is no reference to the company
changing its non-profit donation policies.

The hypocritical double standard continues

On the other hand, the number of
corporations supporting hardcore homosexual activist groups is
staggering. GLSEN gets millions from corporations such as Levi Strauss,
American Airlines, and Kodak. AT&T recently gave $5 million to the
"Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). Macy's, Target,
Microsoft, Amazon, Home Depot and others all lavishly support
homosexual "marriage" causes. The list goes on and on.

Macy's
and Microsoft both give lavishly to homosexual causes, including
support of "gay marriage." Here they in in the Boston Gay Pride
Parade earlier this year.
[MassResistance photos]

A disgraceful slap in the face to the "Appreciation Day" supporters

Obviously, Chick-fil-A is a private company and is free to do anything it wants.

But it's a slap in the face of everyone
who took Dan Cathy's words seriously, and stood up and supported
Chick-fil-A's right to freedom of speech and religion. At this point,
it was all for nothing. We were all played for fools. In an act of
cowardice, they've capitulated and agreed to limit their speech and
expression of religious belief.

Make no mistake: Chick-fil-A is sending a
message to every other business in America that supports the
pro-family position: If you know what's good for you, you'll cave in like we did.
And in addition, if you think it's hard getting corporations to help
support pro-family organizations and causes now, it's about to get a
whole lot worse!

We would like to find a silver lining in
this, but there isn't any. The whole thing stinks. If we would have
known this would be happening, you can bet we would never have gone to
"Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day." And we're not ever going back.

TAKE ACTION: They must hear from pro-family citizens across America!

Contact Chick-fil-A and its chief
operating officer, Dan Cathy. Tell them why you will not patronize
their restaurants again. They'll have enough new business from the
gleeful homosexual activists celebrating their victory.

The other major demand (which
Chick-fil-A seems more than happy to comply with) is that the company
state unequivocally that it will not "discriminate" in any way in
regards to "sexual orientation" or "gender identity." Think about that.
Suppose customers don't want to be served by a man in a dress. Or they
don't want two men kissing or caressing each other (or other perverse
activities) in their restaurant. Too bad. About 20 years ago, when the
homosexual movement started pushing these sexual orientation
non-discrimination laws, conservatives were much too polite to state
the obvious: that it would lead to the wholesale dismantling of
personal religious rights and the forcing of homosexuality on the
public under pain of state punishment. And by and large, they still
don't get it.

Many of our ongoing defeats in such
culture war skirmishes have their roots in this original capitulation:
the very acceptance of the concepts of "sexual orientation" and "gender
identity," and that they should fall under "civil rights"
non-discrimination policies to be followed by all citizens, corporate
entities, and government.